Yup. I'm privileged to have come into Product from an M&E background.
M&E is all about:
Listing desired outcomes & their metrics.
Hypothesizing outputs (& metrics) that may lead to outcomes;
Listing inputs & expected effects on outputs;
Tracking all 3 constantly.
Track that inputs, outputs, & outcomes are on target;
Is correlation between inputs & outputs as modeled? If not, inputs must change;
Is correlation between outputs & outcomes as modeled? If not, outputs must change.
Layers 2 & 3 are critical. Ruthlessly testing & evaluating your Growth Hypothesis is as crucial to success as testing & evaluating your Value Hypothesis. But it often gets overlooked.
Does increasing the number of items each customer across the board adds to their shopping cart (output) really increase my sales (outcome)? What's the curve on that? At what volume do I start to see diminishing returns on that strategy?
To answer such a question, you need very granular data on actions, and exhaustive checks against the outcomes. Scrutinise every correlation and non-correlation.
If I've learned one thing, it's that the more data you have, the more some unexpected proxy metrics come to you.
Which isn't to say you should look at the data only.
The data will present you with options to explore. That's the "science". The "art" is in narrowing those choices down with experience and intuition.
When intellectuals like Prof Lumumba complain that voters picked the person who shared money over them with ideas, they misdiagnose why, and blame the voter. The voter made a "rational" choice, because how can she know Prof isn't lying like EVERY other past politician?
I've talked about this before, from my own experience. As an intellectual politician, those your brilliant ideas you're so in love with? Mama's heard them ALL in the last 6 campaigns. And each time, it was a lie. How have you shown her YOU are different?
As a 3rd Force candidate who (rightly!) wants to win without spending money, you're REALLY saying You want to get enough mostly rural, minimally educated, poor people, to know you so well, they reject money because you will do what everybody since 1960 failed to do. Needs a plan.
An "APCPDP" candidate doesn't have that problem. Her party has workers in all 774 LGAs & 120K Polling Unit Areas. Workers who've spent YEARS building small networks of loyalists who WILL turn out for elections, & vote however the leader says. That's the "Structure" some scoff at.
Where their numbers of loyalists aren't enough, "structure" also doubles as distribution network for election-day bribes. Party has 120K people it can give N500K each, and order to "deliver" 500 votes each.
When I was very small, he would give me the front/back and middle pages of the Vanguard so I could read the cartoons while he started on the rest of the paper.
He helped me memorize the human bones and muscles by tickling me on the spot in question whenever I got one wrong.
He always gave me his fish eyes, "so you won't need glasses like me."
Took us for Chinese every Sunday afternoon.
His letters whenever he travelled.
When I was in Primary 3, he was School Board Chairman. One day, he was touring the school, and came to my class. We stood and greeted. He was all business, straight face, inspecting God knows what. Then as he stepped out the door, he came back, grinned at me, and gave a 👍🏿.
🤣🤣
Beautiful.
A point that goes beyond this product: it's interesting how internal tools built to support the work of the main product(s) can give birth to great standalone products themselves. Slack comes to mind.
At my job, we build a lot of internal or staff-facing products because our business operations have a lot of niche activities that enterprise software in the market doesn't really work for.
I've been thinking a LOT about which of them have markets/demand beyond our firm.
(Here I am trying to cram more stuff into an already crammed roadmap. Let Engineering not catch me.)
2. If it *does* come up and people are saying an amount I consider small is big, it's impolite, awkward, and at times demeaning to insist on correcting them.
I was also taught to unlook if someone accused me of being wasteful with money, as it often came from them having a different context with money.
But please, don't tell people they're wasteful with money or money should last in their hand, to avoid insort.
People - both the ones that consider themselves "haves" and the ones who consider themselves "have nots" - often forget that money conversations are an emotional minefield. Best to err on the side of caution, and spare people's feelings.
Why should FG have IMEIs of everyone's devices by default, and as a requirement for telcos to grant network access ("whitelist")? Globally, the standard is for consumers to give their IMEI data AFTER a theft ("blacklist/blocklist").
Why can't FG get warrants on a per case basis?